Print

[Sam]

Only thing I saw recently was what about Irish players eligibility to play in county cricket if they got test status? I'm unsure how they qualify to do so at the moment, anyone else know?

[edge]

Only thing I saw recently was what about Irish players eligibility to play in county cricket if they got test status? I'm unsure how they qualify to do so at the moment, anyone else know?

EU employment law most likely covers it, is illegal to restrict workers between EU countries.

[johnnyw]

Some major differences between Ireland and Bangladesh:-

1. Ireland might get $20m over 8 years, Bangladesh $70m from the ICC
2. Ireland already have a first class structure of sorts - it's called the County Championship and home to most of their players.

I'm not knocking Bangladesh here, just pointing out that Ireland in many ways are ahead of the same curve and don't receive the same funding. I imagine equal funding would allow a first class structure proper in Ireland and more players making the grade.

There is a structure in Ireland called the inter pros. Made of leinster lightening (Dublin based) northwest warriors (londonderry) and Northern knights (Belfast) They play each other in 3 day matches, 50 and 20 over matches and have been great to bridge the gap from club to international cricket. There are plans to introduce a 4th team from the south for the 20/20s in 2016. There are also plans to get first class status for the 3 day games. Lots of work is going on to try push for further development of the game in Ireland

[RF]

Bit of a tangent (sorry) but those grounds in New Zealand look amazing

[golden duck]

Would there be anything stopping Ireland playing a 5 day game against the lions, or other '2nd' tier international sides (if that makes sense)

[tauhid]

Some major differences between Ireland and Bangladesh:-

1. Ireland might get $20m over 8 years, Bangladesh $70m from the ICC
2. Ireland already have a first class structure of sorts - it's called the County Championship and home to most of their players.

I'm not knocking Bangladesh here, just pointing out that Ireland in many ways are ahead of the same curve and don't receive the same funding. I imagine equal funding would allow a first class structure proper in Ireland and more players making the grade.

1. Isn't that true for any full time member and was also true for Srilanka when bs did not have test status?
2. Well Bangladesh also have a first class structure :-).

You say you are not knocking Bangladesh which you are doing implicitly, but sincerely how do you expect an associated member to be funded same as a full member. Every team including Bd has gone through this stage that Ireland is going through now. Let it run its course without blaming other teams.

Before blaming Bd let us look at ICC  and what they did regarding this issue. Since getting test status India has denied to invite be for a test series ( 15 years now) and also be does not get to play half the tests against decent opposition like other teams do. But I understand this is a phase every team has to go through. Now with the advent of big 3 I am assuming bullying of this sort can only increase. So we are expecting bd to win tests against already good test nations while having played much less test matches thAn they play per year. Does it not sound a little odd.

I fully support Ireland to get test status but I will pledge so that Ireland gets more tests to improve themselves. Therefore, rather than counting just the years in test arena they can actually play more to improve more.

[uknsaunders]

1. Isn't that true for any full time member and was also true for Srilanka when bs did not have test status?
2. Well Bangladesh also have a first class structure :-).

You say you are not knocking Bangladesh which you are doing implicitly, but sincerely how do you expect an associated member to be funded same as a full member. Every team including Bd has gone through this stage that Ireland is going through now. Let it run its course without blaming other teams.

I was highlighting differences not knocking Bangladesh, even implicitly. Yes Bangladesh are a full member but given similar funding, Ireland would be a decent addition to the Full Members club. Somebody also pointed out that Bangladesh didn't have a first class structure when they got full member status. That isn't their fault, but I was pointing out Ireland are better placed in that respect. To me, a much more meaningful comparison would be to Zimbabwe. A smaller playing population with an inter provincial structure.

[Shortpitch]

1. Isn't that true for any full time member and was also true for Srilanka when bs did not have test status?
2. Well Bangladesh also have a first class structure :-).

You say you are not knocking Bangladesh which you are doing implicitly, but sincerely how do you expect an associated member to be funded same as a full member. Every team including Bd has gone through this stage that Ireland is going through now. Let it run its course without blaming other teams.

Before blaming Bd let us look at ICC  and what they did regarding this issue. Since getting test status India has denied to invite be for a test series ( 15 years now) and also be does not get to play half the tests against decent opposition like other teams do. But I understand this is a phase every team has to go through. Now with the advent of big 3 I am assuming bullying of this sort can only increase. So we are expecting bd to win tests against already good test nations while having played much less test matches thAn they play per year. Does it not sound a little odd.

I fully support Ireland to get test status but I will pledge so that Ireland gets more tests to improve themselves. Therefore, rather than counting just the years in test arena they can actually play more to improve more.

Bangladesh Now has better domestic structure than ever before. when it comes to the Asian teams, its the respective cricket boards and politics which delays the development of the game in those countries, be it Bangaldesh, India, Pakistan or Srilanka.
No one is suggesting to strip the Test status of Bangladesh, just saying that Ireland showed enough progress to be included in Test playing nations. I am sure with the way they(Ireland) are playing, In 5 years or so they would be in the middle of the pack of Test playing nations if given a chance...

[Shortpitch]

Yes I saw the statistics provided by star sports but just as you can not compare two players from two different eras you can not compare two teams/ nations improvement from different times.

I am not comparing Srilanka and Bangladesh here, All I was doing is to measure the progress of Bangladesh in International cricket. When Srilanka were minnows, they were compared to India(for their progress) as they took their own time to progress and rise the standard of their game. But Srilanka Surpassed that timeline and created a new benchmark. If one country can do it why not the Other, thats about it. Why they are not able to progress is whole issue and discussion altogether.

[uknsaunders]

I'm not sure Ireland would be in the middle of the test pack, but I imagine they would be better than Zim in all formats and better than Bangladesh overseas. Possibly better than the Windies as well, as they just proved!

[tauhid]

Bangladesh Now has better domestic structure than ever before. when it comes to the Asian teams, its the respective cricket boards and politics which delays the development of the game in those countries, be it Bangaldesh, India, Pakistan or Srilanka.
No one is suggesting to strip the Test status of Bangladesh, just saying that Ireland showed enough progress to be included in Test playing nations. I am sure with the way they(Ireland) are playing, In 5 years or so they would be in the middle of the pack of Test playing nations if given a chance...

I never said or even implied that, anyone is suggesting in this forum to strip test status of Bangladesh.

And again, If Ireland is not given enough tests to play per year in the FTP then middle pack of test playing nations far away it will be even harder for them to compete against lower ranked test teams. It is not about just giving the test status, it is about following it up to ensure the purpose is served. I wish I clarified my views.

[tauhid]

I am not comparing Srilanka and Bangladesh here, All I was doing is to measure the progress of Bangladesh in International cricket. When Srilanka were minnows, they were compared to India(for their progress) as they took their own time to progress and rise the standard of their game. But Srilanka Surpassed that timeline and created a new benchmark. If one country can do it why not the Other, thats about it. Why they are not able to progress is whole issue and discussion altogether.

Please follow my previous post related why this benchmark may not be suitable for teams across different era. It is the same reason you can not compare a batsman having better average to a more famous counterpart in a previous era having less batting avg.

[tauhid]

I'm not sure Ireland would be in the middle of the test pack, but I imagine they would be better than Zim in all formats and better than Bangladesh overseas. Possibly better than the Windies as well, as they just proved!

This is more realistic. But again it is ICC and the respective cricket boards to ensure they get enough opportunities like bigger cricketing nations.

[potzy248]

RIP England. Southee unreal.

[Number4]

Poor poor effort England. Southee bowled beautifully